A Brief History of Women's Pockets

By Carlotta Harold

The first thing a woman will say –with unabashed glee on her face –when you compliment her dress is that it has pockets. This seemingly simple act of joy actually has a long history that demonstrates how women have constantly been put at a disadvantage through subtle means. This mundane aspect of life is one of the myriad forms of everyday sexism that affects the 21st century woman, as well as all feminine-presenting people.

Throughout history, the emphasis has been on men’s pockets. Starting in the 16th century, pockets became more common, quickly becoming so important that some people described not having pockets as similar to losing a limb (Unsworth 2017, 150-158). During this period, men’s pockets were made out of fabrics such as silk, lace, and cotton, and were made by other people (Unsworth 2017, 151). However, women’s pockets were usually made by their own wearers, and they were made out of scrap fabric (Fennetaux 2008, 313-14). In 17th century England, women’s pockets were tie-ons, which meant that they were essentially purses with strings attached to them that were tied around the wearer’s waist. These were harder to access and use than men’s pockets, which had already been inset (Lubitz 2016). They would get extremely heavy, causing the ties to come undone, rendering the pockets useless (Fennetaux 2008, 316). There has always been less of an emphasis placed on the importance of women’s belongings, and fewer precautions taken to protect them.

During the 1600’s, women carried all sorts of household items in their pockets, such as needles, scissors, and thimbles. (Fennetaux 2018, 311). These items demonstrate the strong confinement that women had to the home and to domestic lives. However, women’s pockets also contained items like pocket snuff boxes, smelling bottles, pocket books, and almanacs (Fennetaux 2018, 315). According to Rebecca Unsworth, based on how close pockets were to the body, the items put into them were usually important to the wearer (Fennetaux 2018, 15960), illustrating the emotional connections that women had to pockets, or at least the items inside them. Therefore, a limitation of women’s pockets was a limitation of their freedom to express what held emotional value to them.

Pockets were also associated with female sexuality and intimacy, due to their proximity to the female genital area and because they were hidden under clothes (Fennetaux 2018, 318-323). Women’s pockets were often subject to criticism and questions about what they were hiding (Fennetaux 324). Women were expected to remain pure and innocent, and eventually become housewives—standards that persist today. Pockets seemed to represent the opposite of these ideals, as they exemplified a need to leave the house, to hide things, and to carry money.

In 19th century England, women’s pockets went through a huge change. The silhouette of dresses became form-fitting and slim, which left less space for pockets. This is the reason that the purse (or “reticule”, as it was called) was created (Lubitz 2016). During this time, women’s fashion paid less attention to the practical aspects of dress, especially pockets. Again, the focus on quality and usefulness in women’s garments was thrown aside in favor of aesthetics. Since larger reticules displayed a need to carry money, they carried a stigma associated with the working class (Lubitz). At the same time, since reticules were becoming popular, pockets fell out of use, and the pockets that remained lost their embroidery and decoration. Pockets lost their personal nature and the emotional connection weakened, since all pockets looked similar.

During the 20th century in England, another major shift occurred. In the early 1900’s, women began to wear pants instead of skirts, and pockets started to reappear in women’s clothing. Additionally, due to the high demand for women in the workplace that stemmed from the World Wars, practical, utilitarian clothing with pockets became pervasive (Lubitz 2016). In the late 20th century, women’s clothing, especially pants, became form-fitting and slim, and therefore pockets were either reduced, or completely removed (Lubitz 2016). Finally, in the 1990’s, the designer purse was born, and the fashion industry’s focus shifted to making purses instead of pockets for women (Lubitz 2016). In the 21st century, pockets have become so small women cannot fit even their phones into them (Lubitz 2016), again signaling a lack of focus on practicality for women’s clothing. Additionally, fake pockets have become a trend in modern fashion, creating the appearance of pockets without actually adding them on (Shamsian 2018). Fashion companies tend to prioritize practicality for clothing aimed at men, while prioritizing aesthetics for clothing aimed at women.

Although it seems like a small, insignificant aspect of life, a lack of sufficient pockets negatively affects daily life for women in many ways. It creates the need for external ways of carrying things, like purses, which means more money spent on outfits. The pervasive use of purses reinforces the maternal role that is imposed on women. A lack of pockets also makes it easier to lose belongings, which implies the lower value of women’s personal items. Pockets also represent freedom and mobility for women. The limitations of women’s pockets are an infringement on women’s freedom. It reinforces the idea that women are not meant to work, but to stay in the home and participate in domestic labors. Women’s pockets are one of the many ways in which sexism subtly yet powerfully affects the everyday lives of women. By reinforcing gender stereotypes and placing non-male people at a disadvantage, pockets sustain a need for feminism and feminist activism.

The grains slide through the cracks between their fingers

As if they are scoffing at the meekness of humankind

Time will not dignify them with the honor of facing her

But no one appreciates that she spans beyond them

They think of life as a bridge in which she lays the tiles Endpoints on either side Endpoints that are the equivalent of a grain of sand In the hourglass of the century A relative nothingness in the hourglass of life

But people have their own ends Blinded by the visions of endpoints They wish to trap Time in a cage Restrain her Use her A divine grab of power

Their wish will not be realized Her throne too high Defense too strong

She surveys it all Composed as ever But with the hintings of a sigh As if attempting to release The weight placed on her misty shoulders Of the scapegoating and the dread

Yet through all of this Her pulse stays steady Each beat sending Grains of sand down the hourglass Uniting the universe In a sharp Tick-tick

Geodesic Dome

By Ainsley Anderson

I wanted to create a versatile workspace/classroom design based on the emotions, creativity, and happiness of the user while incorporating sustainable practices. This is neuroarchitecture: "designing efficient environments based not only on technical parameters of legislation, ergonomics and environmental comfort, but also on subjective indices such as emotion, happiness and well-being, (Matoso 2022)."

I designed this 3D-printed geodesic dome using a computer program

In the dome, I envision a space that fosters creativity, reduces anxiety, and improves cognitive performance. Biophilia, or plants (see Seattle Spheres) is a great way of doing this while also improving air quality. The plants would primarily grow vertically along the walls of the dome. Specific plants would include low-maintenance and hypoallergenic species, such as tiny begonias, orchids, tree ferns, and aloes.

In addition to being weather resistant, dome spaces are efficient and sustainable. Due to their spherical nature, dome homes provide a large amount of living space, while taking up very little surface area. They also have a lower area-to-volume ratio and require less energy for heating and cooling and provide great air circulation. They are wind and storm-resistant - a

With this project, I wanted to break down barriers of what we typically think of as architecture - and subsequently consider the way we are systematically held to certain expectations of performance. As a student, I primarily study in a small desk space in a silent and dimly-lit library, with literal barriers on three sides of the desk. This is where most students go when overwhelmed with work - they need to hole up and isolate in order to finish their assignments. For me, this ultimately leads to more stress and discontent, and my peers agree. My idea, the dome as an alternative workspace, to create. With this project, I hope to break down barriers of what we consider necessary for productivity and use rest as a form of resistance.